Joaquin Avila - Goldmark Keynote 2005

“Renewing a Commitment to Seek Justice”

Assistant Professor of Law, Joaquin Avila - Seattle University School of Law

Goldmark Luncheon – Key note Address - February 18, 2005

In my work during the past 30 years or so, I have come across many attorneys who have worked in a variety of areas. Some of them have worked in major firms, some of them have worked in small firms, and some of them have worked in solo practices. Others have worked in public service either in governmental agencies or private non-profit organizations. And what I have found is that a vast majority of these attorneys are simply unhappy with their work. This of course is nothing new. As my colleague Prof. Natasha Martin has studied, this dissatisfaction is well documented and is not healthy since it often produces long term stress that is associated with anxiety, social isolation, and other problems. Some of these problems are structural in nature and relate to the nature of legal education. This raises the question of whether we as legal educators are adequately preparing our students for the emotional roller coasters that are a necessary part of the legal profession. As with everything else, there is, of course, room for improvement.

In selecting a topic for this keynote address, I wanted to address this issue. I started to think about how to make attorneys anti-un-happy. There is, of course, nothing I can say in the short time period that I have been allocated to present this keynote address that would make the drudgery of legal work more pleasant. However, what I have found is that if you engage in activities that give you a sense of reward and personal fulfillment and surround yourself with people who have a similar purpose, the more negative aspects of your job seem more palatable. For me those activities involve the pursuit of justice and the persons who pursue it.

As a professor wannabe, I started to prepare for my remarks in the traditional fashion. I started to develop an elaborate plan for changes in legal education to get at students while they are still impressionable. I started to think about attorneys in major law firms, so I started to formulate ways about the restructuring of pro bono programs at major law firms, where associates and partners would not only receive credits for purposes of their annual billing hour requirements, but would receive compensation above and beyond their regular salaries. I started to think about developing a fund somewhat akin to the cy pres doctrine where attorneys engaged in the pursuit of justice and public interest advocacy efforts could be awarded cash bonuses from a fund financed entirely from a percentage of contingency fee awards and settlements. For those attorneys who subsist on contingency fees, please don’t get nervous, since all of my work was based upon a contingency fee, I am on your side. I was thinking in terms of a .0005% allocation or a flat fee. After awhile it adds up. But there are problems, of course, in developing a theoretical framework. Details, I will leave those sorts of details to my colleagues. After thinking about these and other ideas, I could see that it was turning into an elaborate discourse and a seminar complete with a PowerPoint presentation.

And this initial reaction was to be expected since I tend to complicate things. But it is also attributable to my interest in astronomy and science as a child. When I grew up I wanted to be an astrophysicist. However in college – I couldn’t get beyond the calculus. In fact, in my numerous presentations before attorney groups and community organizations, I would often say I was an aspiring applied astrophysicist. But that did not sound too eloquent and majestic so I started saying that I was aspiring cosmologist until I inadvertently started to say that I was an aspiring cosmetologist. That happens to me a lot. Before starting my teaching career, I used to introduce myself as a voting rights attorney emeritus – I just liked the word. But people in the back of the room thought I said a voting rights merit less attorney. In conference calls, I would often announce myself with the phrase Joaquin is in the house. This is understandable given my Compton upbringing. I stopped because people thought I was saying Joaquin is in the outhouse. But I digress. In any event, the point here is that I have a tendency to complicate things. And so it was with this presentation.

That is until I received some e-mails from my colleagues Professors David Skover and Maggie Chon who suggested that I focus on what I know best. And then I had a wonderful lunch with Barbara Clark and Ada Shen-Jaffe and they also suggested a similar approach. As a result of these discussions and e-mails, I decided to relate to you how I renew my commitment to justice, with the hope that maybe something I will say will resonate with you.

Even in my solo practice which was devoted exclusively to advancing and protecting the right to vote for minority communities, I wish I could say that my law practice was just peachy. Sometimes it was; sometimes it wasn’t. There were moments when in response to papers filed, I had to spend all-nighters. In addition, I really did not like putting on exhibit labels at three o’clock in the morning. Or better yet, counting by hand lists of registered voters and determining the number of voters with Spanish surnames for each voting precinct. Now that was a challenge. However, what kept me going was the knowledge that some day a case would be won, an election system would be changed, and a local community would have the opportunity to change the course of their history.

Please rest assured that I procrastinate. I set aside time for rearranging the post-it titles on my notebooks. Sometimes if my office tray gets too messy, I will think about Bert from Sesame Street and start to rearrange the paper clips. This I do after 5:00 pm.

Please also note that sometimes it is difficult to get motivated.

But what I have learned over the past 30 plus years of my legal career is that I need catalysts to give me a jump start, not with cattle prods, but with shared experiences and ideas. I cannot do it alone. For me it has to be an outside demand on my time where an engagement of my time and energy are required. If there isn’t this outside demand on my time and energy I find that an initial reluctance overwhelms me and I fall back on time tested rationalizations such as “I am too busy” and “I don’t have the time.” But once the initial hurdles are overcome, I find that the engagement ultimately produces a sense of fulfillment and personal reward. And it doesn’t always work out that way – sometimes the “I am too busy” and “I don’t have the time” rule the day. But there is comfort in knowing that you start over in the morning.

And I would challenge you, members of the Bar, that we desperately need to renew our commitment to justice. Whether you define justice in terms of pro bono work, public interest litigation, or utilize other parameters, we as attorneys and members of this very noble profession are burdened with the mantle of leadership. We have to step up to the plate and do our share.

Especially in these times. In this month’s issue of Scientific American, according to a national poll conducted for a national report issued in December 2004, 63% indicated that the federal government should indefinitely detain suspected terrorists, and 36% indicated that the federal government should outlaw some activities even if constitutionally protected. Are we returning to the climate of the Korematsu era, where U.S. citizens of Japanese ancestry were interned in concentration camps? That is why we, collectively and individually, need to renew our commitment to justice. Too much is at stake. We need to be aggressive in protecting our civil liberties. For without such liberties, we will have a return to our past, where only a select group of people benefited from this nation’s rights and privileges.

And leadership is the key.

In my classes, I tell my students that they are the future leaders of our society. I also tell them that when I see them I don’t see them as students, but as future judges, elected officials, heads of civil right and public interest organizations – I see them as leaders. Some of the students snicker. Others, however, think about it.

And this process which I have just described is playing a prominent role in the renewal of my commitment to justice while at Seattle University. It was not planned and it didn’t start out that way. But my work environment is both directly and subtly resulting in an ongoing renewal of my commitment to justice.

For starters how can I not get excited when the school’s values include the value of justice? The school’s mission statement states: “We foster a concern for justice and the competence to promote it.” How can I not get excited when our school’s new dean, Testy Kellye, both endorses and supports an election reform symposium to chart the way for the contribution of ideas and policies that will seek to make the electoral process more transparent. How can I not be excited when I am surrounded by persons who themselves excel in their respective areas and who truly are an inspiration to others and their students. And it is in our law schools that we are preparing our students for future leadership positions. At Seattle University there are instructors and professors who have a daily impact on the lives of our students. Some of whom are here: People like Profs. Shapiro, Martin, Boerner, McGee, Lidman, Lustbader, and Chung. In addition we have an Access to Justice Institute. Who cannot be excited about pursuing justice after a discussion with its director, Suda Shetty? And even in non-traditional teaching areas, such as fundraising, there is always a synergistic effect about solidifying our economic base after a discussion with Susan Ahearn, our Director of Development.

And a key element to my work environment is our students. I supervise several students who are engaged in independent studies. I am continually impressed with the caliber of students. And it is their energy and enthusiasm that helps me to renew my commitment to justice. For example, instead of tuning out after the elections, some students wanted to take proactive steps to strengthen our electoral democracy. That excites me. I have one student, Kathleen Hammer, who is working on a paper on election observers that will turn into suggested legislative reforms that can be implemented in state legislatures. I have another student, who is not receiving any credit, Matthew Rover, who is working on a project that could result in legislation to improve voter turnout. That excites me. I have another student, Jennifer Dinning, who is working on an independent study to define the contours of when the Second Amendment protects the right of armed rebellion. That both excites me and concerns me. We may have to write an extended disclaimer on that paper.

In addition, I receive a lot of energy from the students who participate in the National Frederick Douglas Moot Court Competition: Mark Saku, Elinor Tesfamarian, and De Monte Walker, Taylor Grant, and Shane Yellish, have devoted the past three weeks and a half – meeting on a daily basis to improve their advocacy skills. Also there are two first year students who are participating in the National Hispanic Bar Association’s moot court competition: Alexandra Narvaez and Lydia Koroma. That excites me.

The ripple effects of these human catalysts are immeasurable. For example, I am involved in efforts to solidify our international perspective by participating in our U.S./Mexico program. In my discussions with my friend, the Consul of Mexico, Jorge Madrazo, we have talked about long distance teaching and faculty exchanges. From these discussions, I have renewed my interest on exploring the impact of the internet in facilitating long distance training. But think of the possibilities. What if we could connect elementary schools in Mexico and other parts of South America with schools in the United States? As a result of these interchanges, there could be a joint teaching program where the students from each country help other students to master their respective languages. The possibilities are endless. And yet, this interest would not have blossomed without my discussions with the Consul.

Finally, how can one not be inspired to do something after hearing of the personal sacrifices undertaken by your honoree today, Ada Shen-Jaffe.

In summary, renewing a commitment to justice is very personal. I have given you what has made a difference in my voting rights practice and what is continuing to provide this renewal at the law school. There is no simple formula; nor is there a simple prescription. For you the path might start with mentoring, for others the path is surrounding yourself with people that will help you overcome the stuff that occurs on a daily basis. Whatever it is, pursue it.

I believe in the power of an individual to do great things. There is no reason why the next major civil rights or public interest case can’t be handled by you. There is no reason why the next innovative way to finance a program to provide incentives to the bar to address issues of equity can’t come from you. You are only limited by your imagination. You just need to surround yourself with people that can help you expand your horizons. But you have to take the first step.

Let Ada’s narrative be the inspiration that causes you take that first step. Too much is at stake. We no longer have the luxury of you sitting on the sidelines. Too much is at stake. Just do it.